(04-01-2013 07:43 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote: I agree with you with respect the players. It's just that I approach it from the perspective that the revenue being generated should flow through to them as opposed to trying to cap revenue and expenses.
But tracking the "should" back to normal freely competitive markets doesn't work just because I would
prefer Big Time College Football to be free-standing commercial enterprises with a franchise relationship with their college, paying for the use of the name and an
allowance (rather than requirement) for the associated players to take classes, either then or at some future date.
Tracking the justification back to normal freely competitive market institutions only kicks in
if that reform is instituted. Then, surely, they would be profit-seeking organizations, rather than cost-seeking organizations as they frequently are at present, and the checks and balances of a freely competitive market could be brought to bear by policing collusive behavior without a public interest benefit.
So long as we are under the current interlocking structures of collusive arrangements and captive markets, then given that the coaches salary arms races lead to increases in student activity fees and the cost of education for hundreds of thousands if not millions of students nationwide, I'm in favor of some form of negotiated cease fire in the arms race.